I can't remember where, but I've heard the mathematical research process being described as (paraphrasing):
"Once in a while we get a giant that makes huge strides in many fields. What is left for the rest of us is to walk in their wake and clean up and tighten up the theory based on the ideas that they provided".
Graham's point about how being intelligent and having new ideas are two different things is interesting, but I'm not convinced that one is better than the other. I'm not sure a world full of giants is better - you need people who spend time tightening and working on the existing theory as well.
The world has no lack of people tightening and working on existing theory, basically every knowledge worker taking a salary performs that role. So moving a few more of those to try to do new things wouldn't budge that huge micro optimization machine much at all.
Moreover, ideas are worthless if you aren't smart and diligent enough to see them through. Emphasizing ideas, to me, feels like the wrong thing because this encourages, for most people, a lazy attitude where recognition is expected for having an idea (whereas recognition is only due for making something out of your idea). In the end, ideas are cheap. Every giant had both the idea (which may have been through luck and timing plus deep knowledge earned through hard work and persistence) plus those other abilities to make something out of it, without which they would not be giants.
I mean, better and worse doesn't really exist. They just are. Being smart has certain consequences, and being inventive has others. And what's better for the world (for some definition of 'good') may not be what's better for the individual - just ask people who volunteer to pick up litter. Certainly it seems like being inventive is much more profitable for the individual than being smart, but of course that's not all that matters.
"Once in a while we get a giant that makes huge strides in many fields. What is left for the rest of us is to walk in their wake and clean up and tighten up the theory based on the ideas that they provided".
Graham's point about how being intelligent and having new ideas are two different things is interesting, but I'm not convinced that one is better than the other. I'm not sure a world full of giants is better - you need people who spend time tightening and working on the existing theory as well.